PDA

View Full Version : '2001' Ba



Grand_Lunar
2005-Dec-17, 05:17 PM
Don't know if this was posted before (I hope its not ToSeeked!)

Anyway, I was wondering how many aspects of BA one can spot in '2001' (aside from the year already passing us without a manned Jupiter mission!)

Here's what I figured:

The dust on the landing platforms doesn't behave as it would in a vaccum (for that matter, they need a janitor to sweep them clean!).

The stars move in the background for certain shots of the Discovery. Same goes for the pod Dave goes in to retrive Frank.

Earth looks a little pastel compared to real photos of it (even ones at the time the film was made).

There are a few other items of BA, but I'll let them slide because they refer to knowledge gained after the film was made (the appearence of the moon, Jupiter and its moons).

Dr Nigel
2005-Dec-17, 05:39 PM
The zero-G sequence in the shuttle to the orbital station isn't quite right. Is that BA or bad physics?

DukePaul
2005-Dec-17, 06:12 PM
Here is something that may qualify as **(bad safety) in 2001. They dug the monolith out of the moon surface yet they did not apply the basic safety practice of bracing the monolith so it would not fall over and crush the workers. OSHA would definitely cite them for that hazard.

Dr Nigel
2005-Dec-18, 08:38 PM
Ah, yes, but matbe they'd used ground-penetrating radar to find that there was still about 10 feet of it buried in the regolith, so it could only fall over if it was structurally unsound...

Disinfo Agent
2005-Dec-19, 04:39 PM
Don't know if this was posted before (I hope its not ToSeeked!)Alas, there already was a thread about this (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?t=7715&highlight=2001). :)


Anyway, I was wondering how many aspects of BA one can spot in '2001' (aside from the year already passing us without a manned Jupiter mission!)That wasn't bad astronomy. Just a prediction that didn't come true. And it probably was never meant to be a precise prediction.

Grand_Lunar
2005-Dec-20, 04:12 AM
Thanks, DisInfo Agent. Wo is me!

Oh, I agree this wasn't a prediction of any sorts. I was just anticipating someone pointing that stuff out.

In a way, a Jupiter mission like the Discovery's mission did come true; with Galileo. At least, IMO it did.

eburacum45
2005-Dec-20, 03:27 PM
There is a good one in the IMDB entry for this film;
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062622/goofs


Factual errors: As the PanAm shuttle closes in on the space station, we see both from their point of view, i.e., they are both stationary while the stars behind rotate. However, the shadows on the space station do not move at all.
This is subtle, and we earthbound humans would tend to overlook such an error; but using today's computer graphics such an error should not occur (unless someone drops a royal clanger).
In fact the correct effect can be reproduced using Celestia; here is a flash animation I've just made showing the moving shadows which aren't there in the film...
http://img66.imageshack.us/my.php?image=2001new1pe.swf